Even as society progresses to encompass equal opportunity for all regardless of gender, there remains a clear gender division when it comes to music. Making a choice between the drums or the flute may seem like a simple matter as one would assume that the deciding factor in this choice is one's personal preferences. However, our daily decisions are in fact in conformity of a social paradigm. Therefore, while the choice between drums or the flute might appear simple, such a decision might be based on one underlying reason: gender.

Our decisions are in adherence to social paradigms and this means that for a girl, expectations of her playing a violin would be greater than that of a trumpet. Decisions relating music and gender are not limited to just instrumental choices as even genres and musical influences have specific gender associations. Boys playing the drums and listening to rock or hip hop music while girls play the violin and listen to boy bands and ballads are some common gender stereotypes. In comparison to issues such as gender equality in education or social status, one might quickly dismiss the stigmatization in relation to music as negligible. However, it is important to note the repercussions of gender associations in music as a hint of the sexist undertones present in society.

The research paper published by Abeles (2009) opines that despite the advances within society to break gender boundaries, the choice of instruments among adolescent musicians are continually in line with gender associations of the instruments. Using research data and studies, Abeles (2009) affirms that gender associations with instruments remain and while the percentage of cross-gender instrument selection has increased, it is not significant enough to indicate a paradigm shift. The focus upon studies and research data increase the credibility of his assertion although his scope is confined to students and youth performing bands. However, there is a similar argument from...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...Critically Evaluate the Deductive Argument from Evil
Logically, can Evil and the “three-O” God co-exist in this universe? The deductive argument from evil says they cannot. In this essay I will explain the argument and analyze why it is valid but unsound. I will do this by discussing fallacious nature of the premise that if God were omnipotent and knew he could prevent the existence of evil without sacrificing some greater good he would then necessarily prevent it. The essay will propose the following evaluation of the deductive argument from Evil: that each premise logically follows from its antecedent, but that the concepts in the premises themselves are not entirely understood and can be refuted. God’s Omni benevolence, specifically, need not incontrovertibly mean the prevention of every evil on earth - not even necessarily natural evil. Furthermore, I will address the purpose of evil and the compatibility of God’s all-good nature with the existence of evil. Concluding finally that the deductive argument from evil does not justify a belief in the nonexistence of God, despite the strength of the overall argument.
The deductive argument from evil is an explanation for the incompatibility of evil and a “three-O” God. It answers to the problem of evil, which is the problem of whether or not such a God could logically coexist with evil. This argument both...

...Euthanasia: The Argument
Euthanasia is defined as; “the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependant human being for his or her alleged benefit. (The key word here is “intentional”. If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia.)” Source: www.euthanasia.com/definition
The act of euthanasia is a very controversial issue which has many supporters, both for and against and has been a topic of the world’s media, time and time again. There arearguments both for and against in various cultures, religious circles, medical professionals and other ‘social’ groups. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, which is one of our basic human rights and so is the right to live or not to live.
I have broken the argument into for and against topics but there are some sub divisions in which opinions of others are presented. I have remained impartial in this argument and only try to show points of view for many of the arguments that are bought forward.
Practical Arguments For
A point that is a paramount belief of many people, who are pro-euthanasia, is that of the belief that euthanasia can be regulated, even though they have recognition of the fact that there will still be problems relating to this issue. This being said they also believe that there is no reason why euthanasia cannot be regulated, this could be by; medical professionals, the government and the law. However,...

...THE TYPES OF ARGUMENTS
Normally we classify all arguments into one of two types: deductive and inductive. Deductive arguments are those meant to work because of their pattern alone, so that if the premises are true the conclusion could not be false. All other arguments are considered to be inductive (or just non-deductive), and these are meant to work because of the actual information in the premises so that if the premises are true the conclusion is not likely to be false. The difference is between certainty (we can be sure the conclusion is correct) and probability (we can bet on the conclusion being correct).
We now go one step further. A deductive argument with the right form is considered to be valid, regardless of the truth of the premises. When the premises are in fact true and the argument is valid, then we call it sound.
Inductive arguments can be seen as strong (the conclusion is more likely to be true because of support provided by the premises) or as weak. When an inductively strong argument does have true premises, we call it cogent.
How strong does an argument have to be to be acceptable? A good rule to start with is that the more is at risk, the more likely you want the conclusion to be correct. For instance, in a civil case (the kind that occurs when one person sues another) a jury is asked to decide between two...

...behind your thoughts. You were able to link theory with practical application and real-world settings. However, remember that in an inductive argument, you cannot guarantee the conclusion. A deductive argument follows the if “this” than “that” format, so it must be true. Please see my attached comments regarding 1 premise/conclusion issue, 1 strict/loose, and 3 in part IIa. I would suggest the following to improve the professional nature of your work: Please always include a proper title page. In the top half of the page, centered and double-spaced, include: title of the paper, your first and last name, course number and name, instructor name, and date of submission. Please review the rubric and comments, which have been made directly in your attached paper. Keep working hard. I look forward to your next assignment.
Best,
Prof. Trojanowski
M1: Assignment 3
Assignment 3 Grading Criteria | Maximum Points | |
Identified and explained types and component parts of arguments displaying analysis and application of research. | 32 | 30 |
Accurately created diagrams of arguments reflecting comprehension, analysis of information, and critical thinking. | 20 | 17 |
Constructed original arguments demonstrating in-depth understanding of concepts. | 20 | 16 |
Evaluated instances from contemporary media to identify arguments as representative of inductive or...

...﻿Crito Argument
“I do have these things in mind, Crito, and also many others.” (Crito 45a)
In the “Crito”, there are two arguments, one of which Crito argues for why Socrates should escape the prison, and the second, for which Socrates argues for why he should remain in prison and accept his death sentence. I will assess both arguments and show the strengths and weaknesses that Crito and Socrates both presented in the dialogue. I argue for Socrates, for which his argument is based on the principle that doing unjust actions ruins one’s soul, and life is not worth living with a ruined soul.
The dialogue recounts Socrates’ last days before his execution. Socrates had been accused of corrupting the youth and not worshipping the Gods of state. During his trial, he denied all accusations and attempted to defend himself by proving his innocence by using logic and reason, what Socrates is known for. He was found guilty, and given the sentence of death. The dialogue starts off with his long time friend, Crito, visiting him in prison and thus, presenting an argument for his escape.
Crito presents three arguments for why Socrates should escape.
His first argument is that if Socrates does not escape, then he will hurt Crito in two ways; one of which Crito will lose a valuable friend when Socrates dies, and two, Crito’s reputation will suffer. People will gain the notion, that it...

...Possible Arguments
Christy Wernert
South University Online
Composition III Eng2001 S01
Possible Arguments
Human rights are always being challenged by society in one way or another, where some of these issues should be left to the individuals. The three topics looked at today for this essay is just a few issues that society needs to take a good hard look at. The first issue is challenging Women’s Rights and the fact that females should not be able to fly commercial flights. The second issue explores the way we choose to die, and if it is legal to have someone aid us in the last stage of life. Finally, the third issue deals with the right to die, and the reasons why one should be able to die at one’s own hand. All of the issues are examples of what our society deals with every day in the United States and the world.
Getting women’s rights to just being comparable to men’s rights in the work place has been going on for centuries. Women’s rights seem to be getting better, and then you run into an article like this one. There are some people that don’t want women pilots to fly commercially, and some polls are at 94% against (Anger, 1977, p. 193). Some of these problems that came up are; they would take the co-pilots mind of his work agenda because of her double Ds, menopause, and PMS (Anger, 1977, p. 194). Amelia Earhart was even brought up just to say that she was the “greatest lady pilot ever”, but she crashed somewhere over...

...The common factor between them all the critics comes down to how you can rewrite the definition of CSR as one that makes it easiest for you to dismiss it. So, for instance, some people argue that an approach to corporate social responsibility that achieves business benefits is nothing of that sort - THAT's just good business. So CSR must be only those things that are of no direct benefit to the business - ie. philanthropy. Cue the arguments about how CEOs should not be giving shareholders money away on their personal causes and projects.
This is just dumb. Nobody says that marketing is not marketing if it benefits the business, or HR is not 'pure' HR if its priorities align with the company's strategic objectives. CSR is about managing changing expectations by society on the business - it is not philanthropy.
On that basis, the whole suggestion that CEOs are giving away investors' money is no more meaningful than to say that, given that we know that only half of our company's advertising works (although we don't know which half) means that the marketing director is irresponsibly giving investors money away.
Whether they like it or not investors rely on the senior management to manage the business - the whole of the business. They aim to see the real value of the business increase, and the long term value of the shares to reflect this. Those shareholders are owners - but they have never sought to micromanage the business on other aspects. Generally...

...individuals to ignore their role in the issue and not take responsibility for their lives. Labeling obesity as a disease gives people other factors to blame on being obese instead of blaming themselves.
The author then quotes another medical professional whose argument agrees with the author’s argument, that obesity is not a disease. The quote explains that throughout the years obesity has become more pandemic even though the way our bodies are made today are the same as centuries ago. What has changed between those times and now is the environment in which we live. There are more varieties now than ever before and people have a hard time making healthy choices and decide to eat unhealthy foods. Therefore we cannot label obesity as a disease, but it can be labeled as a choice. There are many ways to prevent becoming obese. However with most real diseases there is no prevention, the diseases are not caused by anything the person has done wrong. While being obese typically comes from making the wrong lifestyle choices.
I agree with the thesis the author made in his argument however I think he could have incorporated some of the reason why others may believe that obesity is a disease. If he would have put those ideas in the argument he could have used them to argue why those premises are wrong. The author took an approach that gave reasons that strictly placed blame on obese people for being the reason why they are...